The NRA is the most active gun safety and shooting organization in the country. It sponsors over 11,000 tournaments. It is the oldest civil liberties organization in the United States.

Why would anyone “despise” the NRA?

There have been recent issues with the use of funds for president Wayne LaPiere, and that is a good reason to be critical of the org as it should be spending such money elsewhere (for gun rights and shooting sports), but the general mission of the NRA is not one that anyone should “hate” anymore than a person might “hate” the American Civil Liberties Union, or Planned Parenthood. It’s the American way!

It makes sense that if you are for strict gun control, then you are against the civil liberty advocacy the NRA provides- such as a pro life person might be against NARAL’s advocacy for choice, but to “despise” an organization simply for being the messenger for what over a hundred million Americans believe in- our right to bear arms- does not make any sense.

VP Biden’s gun confiscation (ban and buy back of semi automatic firearms) is not a winning message.

Gun control is one of those issues that polls well broadly, but as soon as people realize that what is being advocated for is some kind of expensive fee, or confiscation of their property… it’s a real loser.

anon — I don’t think there’s widespread agreement about gun rights as a civil liberty (or as a societal good) in the same respect as there is about speech. In that sense, the ACLU and the NRA are very different. If you do not believe that the sort of gun rights for which the NRA advocates fall inside the ambit of the Second Amendment’s protections–as many do not, including among experts in constitutional law–then you probably do not see the NRA as being a civil liberties organization.

I would think that an absolutist regarding gun rights would despise the apparent graft and misuse of funds that have drained its coffers and hobbled its standing and advocacy for gun safety and unlimited gun rights by its entrenched leadership.

In fact, the more one supports the NRA’s espoused agenda – the more one would be expected to despise the obvious mismanagement and misuse of funds that could have been spent elsewhere.

Now as for those of us who view the NRA as captured by the gun manufacturing industry – having long ago left the interests of sportsmen behind – I would guess most of us view it like the tobacco lobby and the pretroleum institute – albeit with a constitutional fig leaf protecting its most extreme positions.

That is a somewhat thin argument considering what has been presented on this blog for the last couple years. Free speech is violence- remember?

The devil is in the details. The ACLU defends “hate speech” and burning the flag. There are plenty of Americans that find the nuances of ACLU advocacy to be wrong.

Also, you avoided NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Abortion is also a right. Yet, a large minority of Americans that believe abortion is murder. The vast majority do not think abortion should be legal in the third trimester.

NARAL advocates for such things. And some of the ways in which money is made by prop choice advocacy groups- such as the selling of fetuses/ fetal tissue- is highly controversial. Perhaps even illegal.

89er-

Very true. But making such a case while at the same time slamming the NRA for its effective advocacy rings somewhat hollow. It would be hard to argue that the NRA has not effectively blocked gun control laws and bans since the 1970s; so while this current revelation about its misuse of money makes members/ gun rights advocates angry, the NRA is still very effective- which is why the NRA is “despised.”

… and Senator Murphy is openly out as favoring the confiscation of semi automatic rifles and pistols. Also, “large capacity magazine” bans and confiscations.

That may “go well” in CT and NY- although most owners did not comply, creating hundreds of thousands of people who are committing a felony- such advocacy may be even less accepted in “pro gun” states.

Funny thing, people do not like it when you tax, ban, and confiscate their property.

I doubt it plays in Kansas etc. Try that federally and you will have a real mess on your hands, unless you grandfather weapons. And a large %, perhaps even the majority, of gun owners, are not going to run down to pay taxes and fines on hundreds of millions of firearms they own. They will just- do nothing.

The First Amendment only protects against state suppression of speech. When you talk about “free speech” being violence, you’re confusing different uses of the phrase “free speech.” There’s nothing remotely inconsistent with simultaneously recognizing that speech can inflict violence while also condemning government suppression of speech.

And again, the percentage of Americans (and maybe more importantly, the percentage of constitutional law scholars across the ideological spectrum) who support the ACLU’s free speech work dwarfs the percentage of Americans (and conlaw scholars) who support the NRA’s gun rights work. But it also may be true that the furthest reaches of the ACLU’s work crosses the bounds into advocacy territory and that the ACLU is both a civil liberties and an advocacy organization (and it may be true that the NRA does some civil liberties work).

The core of my point is simply that it’s a stretch to call the NRA–which is plainly a gun advocacy organization–a civil liberties group. For what it’s worth, NARAL is probably closer to the line than the ACLU (although I still think NARAL is closer to being a civil liberties org than the NRA — NARAL seeks to promote access to abortion rather than abortion itself, whereas the NRA is actively pro-gun, not simply pro-access-to-guns).

fender- You know nothing about me, my background, my experience with firearms, how and where I use them today or used them in the past. I can say that I am an expert. Easily, many times over.

No one in Berkshires or Bennington County is going to “catch a stray round” except maybe in a hunting accident. What on earth are you talking about?

And anyone who would be reckless enough to use a gun in such a way (to spray stray bullets) is probably not possessing the firearm lawfully anyway. That is usually the work of felons in an urban area.

Why is it “gibberish” that the NRA is a civil liberties organization??

Gun rights are enumerated in our constitution as well as in common law. The NRA protects gun rights. You may feel the message is bad- or tired- but that does not mean it is not a civil liberties issue- it is.

The NRA is the oldest civil liberties org in the USA. If not, please state a private org that protects civil liberties that is older?

I don’t assume you support every proposal. I am guessing you believe that people have a constitutionally protected right to have firearms. That means you would definitely be against confiscation, I would imagine?

Anyhow, If you like to shoot maybe we can hit the range sometime.

abl- The general premise of that position (free speech is violence) is about speech generally, including in public schools, or in a public forum.

“Hate speech” is not limited to what people believe restrictions should be on a private college campus. There are many people who believe that “hate speech” should not be legal, period. Many people who believe flag burning should not be legal- in the public forum.

You make the same mistake of which you accuse me. Your parochial experience in VT or wherever isn’t universal so basing your perspective on that is as myopic as accusing someone else of a geographically based viewpoint.

Maybe but also entirely possible you didn’t… my clients were a tiny LE organization, relatively.

I’d run into people who were surprised my agency had people with guns and badges. And yet I was gobsmacked more than once by the dimness of our Famous But Incompetent friends when they were in our area of expertise revealing how clueless they were.